Posted on 01/04/2002 8:52:30 AM PST by editor-surveyor
There is something very wrong inside the Justice Department of the United States and there has been for some time.
Various newspapers are now reporting that under President Clinton, the Federal Bureau of Investigation was ordered to stand down on various terrorist investigations.
One of the most egregious examples is the failure of the bureau to investigate fundraising organizations like "The Holy Land Fund," based in Arizona, which allegedly funneled millions of dollars in donations to Middle Eastern terrorists.
Although the Bush administration has now frozen the assets of the fund, it was apparently allowed to operate for 8 years despite the FBI intelligence that was presented to Mr. Clinton and then-Attorney General Janet Reno. One bureau source told the press that Ms. Reno felt any investigation of "The Holy Land Fund" would lead to anti-Arab sentiment and therefore was opposed to such an investigation.
As always, Ms. Reno will not comment on any aspect of her tenure as attorney general that is at all controversial.
There is no question now that under Ms. Reno and then-FBI Director Louis Freeh, Americans were put at great risk. The Wen Ho Lee-Chinese espionage case still has not been explained, and the fact that the 19 Sept. 11 terrorists weren't even on the FBI's radar screen is about as frightening as Janet Reno's passion for political correctness.
The current attorney general, John Ashcroft, has made no attempt to examine Ms. Reno's bizarre behavior or update the public about the Marc Rich investigation or anything else. Mr. Ashcroft specializes in looking dour and stonewalling. While Congress is attempting to get documents about President Clinton's dubious foreign fundraising and FBI abuses in Boston, Ashcroft is refusing to cooperate at all.
And this isn't a political issue. Conservative Congressman Dan Burton and liberal Congressman Barney Frank have actually joined forces to try and pry this information from Ashcroft's hands. If that's not amazing, then nothing is.
The truth is that for nearly 8 years, the Justice Department has been corrupt and inefficient. Janet Reno botched nearly every important decision she had to make including Waco and Elian Gonzalez. Time after time, Ms. Reno refused to approve investigative initiatives sought by the FBI. And time after time, Mr. Freeh sat in his plush government office refusing to let the American people know what was happening.
Now Mr. Ashcroft is doing the same thing. There is no reason on this earth why the public should not know the status of the Rich pardon probe. Or the anthrax investigation. And what about Enron, Mr. Attorney General – are you going to look into that? Millions of Americans were hosed while some Enron executives made millions.
How about a comment on that, Mr. Ashcroft?
See there. You can't even remember who you argue with right here on FR, which is about the only threads you are on; why would you expect me to believe your "facts?"
You are not half as clever as you think you are. As you well know I've kept copies of every exchange I've had regarding Brown. You are the one who can't seem to remember the names of ANYONE, on FR or off, who convinced you that Brown was not murdered. Why you couldn't even remember that you had said Brown wasn't murdered, could you? And you have NEVER, EVER cited facts to back up your claim about Brown. You RUN from facts ... like a democRAT.
You FEAR an autopsy of Brown and Foster ... and other Freepers should be wondering WHY.
OF COURSE HIS HANDS ARE TIED ! Good grief, don't you bother tp read what I and others type ; you know, those who aren't FLIRTING with you ?
I give up; I really do.
Do you understand what " incrimentalism means ? It is the opposite of right now / immediately; more like baby steps, just a litle bit at a time. Just look at where income tax started out at, and when. The same thing is true as far as other things are concerned.
If you are confused about just who does what, read the Constitution ; it's all in there. A president is not allowed / permitted to do what so many, here, demand that he do. Do I want change ? Of course I do ; however , I know what is possible, and what isn't, and why.
Don't you even know that the Dems / Dem Machines have been stealing elections for more than 100 years ? Have you NEVER heard about "Boss " Tweed, the first Mayor Daley, the second Mayor Daley, how LBJ stole ALL of his elections in Texas , ad infenitum ?
Permit me to reitterate ... THIS IS NOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA's JOB !
The rest of us KNEW what was going on, dear, and so did EVERYONE else, except YOU; eveidently. And NO Clinton can't be blamed for what happened in Florida ; unlike what went on in New York.
I've already told you that I give up; let it lie. Go read the FR archieves ; go read Alamogirl's collection, the stuff about tainted blood, the stuff about China.Then go read some good history books ... PLEASE.
Go ahead. Cite the portion of the Constitution that prohibits the President's people from investigating the CRIMES of past President's and their lackeys. Cite the portion that prohibits the President's people from investigating matters of TREASON, murder of a Secretary of Commerce, election tampering and possible blackmail of government officials (elected and otherwise).
There is NO way that , right after being sworn in ( or even 6 months afterwards ) , President Bush could have done what you demand he must do, or you'll hold your breath until you turn blue. Many people,in this country, ALL of the media, and the Dems, would have gone quite insane, and woud have begun impeachment hearings, and YES, the would somehow have thrown him out of office. Why can't you understand this ?
Frankly, the FFs were RIGHT, in their belief that the " average " person was far too stupid to choose the president, which is WHY we have the Electoral College. It just hasn't worked out the way they had planned ; however , they certainly understood people. You just don't understand any of this, do you ?
I don't either but was it only 900 files? When Filegate was first exposed the Whitehouse only admitted to having a few hundred files. Then they had to admit it was 400. Then Klayman entered the picture and proved it was at least 900. And there was testimony by Linda Tripp about what she saw that suggests the number was in the THOUSANDS. And MOST of those that were admitted to were Republican. But who is to say that the Clinton's didn't also pull files on fellow democRATS. Afterall, that information might be JUST as useful at times. Look at what happened during the impeachment. Several of the most powerful democRAT Senators (Byrd, for example) stated before the vote that Clinton did what was charged and what was charged was impeachable. Yet they voted not to convict. One wonders if a little "pressure" might not have been applied.
Permit me to reitterate ... THIS IS NOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE USA's JOB !
But in each of those cases they didn't steal the elections using money from governments ... money that they got by committing TREASONABLE acts (i.e., giving them access to secrets and restricted technologies). THAT makes it the President's job (or at least Ashcroft's). And if Ashcroft is not doing HIS job, then it IS most certainly Bush's job to fire him. And it IS most certainly their job to investigate whether someone in Clinton's organization, or from one of those communist countries that gave the DNC the cash, murdered a Secretary of Commerce in order to keep him from exposing their TREASONOUS election tampering.
You wrote: " The less government has to spend, the less they will, with this president"....yeah, right, we've seen government time after time 'not' spend money they don't have, right! That's exactly why we don't have a national debt running in the trillions, right?
You wrote: " The president has already said that his plan / taxes won't be raised ; he'll veto anything they try to do in the future"....well, first of all he said they wouldn't NOT raise them over his dead body! So his ass is covered by letting taxes go up while he is alive!
And why should anyone believe a known liar? He pulled that old "I won't raise taxes' horsepockey in Texas....signed a pledge that he wouldn't--specifically mentioning the Sales Tax---and man oh man oh man....soon as he could, he proposed an increase in the sales tax to the Texas Legislature....Texicans were saved from that increase by , gulp, Democratic legislators!! Oh, I know...there was lots of good reasons for suggesting an increase and his heart really wasn't in it, but yada yada yada yada yada.
I am fully aware of what incrementalism is....I am also aware that incrementalism does not work for the right side of the aisle--it is wishful thinking, dreaming on your part! The GOP hasn't a clue as to how it's done--all they can do is whimper as the Demoncraps beat the daylights out of them.
Draw yourself a friggin diagram with the figures I gave you above....and figure out when there will be an incremental move to the right! It ain't going to happen! The Demoncraps ALWAYS demand so much more than is reasonable and the GOP offers a small compromise over the existing base--because the Demoncraps play hardball, the GOP ups their offer, the Dems melt a wee bit, the GOP offers to give up even a little more, and the Dems act like they are really gonna compromise by accepting this. Actually they are rolling in the aisles laughing their asses off all the way to the bank at the way they suckered the Republicans yet again!!!! What part of the bastids always stepping to the left do you not understand? Since when can you increase Education by some $8 billion dollars and call that an incremental step to the right?
Constitution? Surely you jest! Bush supporters are not interested in the Constitution! Whatever St. George wants is what you want.
Puleeze...."a president is not allowed? Joke, right....they usurp powers all the time, just like the congresscritters.....big whooooo! Lady, you live in a la la world if you think the President of the United States can not release documents to congressional committees, or if you think he can't order the DOJ to investigate/prosecute as necessary.....
What is possible only exists because people make it happen. The President can sign a bill for an education department while not anywhere in the Constitution is the word education even mentioned....and you offer me he can't do it because he is not permitted or allowed to do so under the Constitution.
Cite the portion of the Constitution that prohibits the DOJ from investigating these matters. You are the one claiming it does so the onus is on YOU.
The upholding the laws of the land , in the oath of office, does NOT mean that he gets to play policeman.
Then just what does it mean? Isn't the President supposed to pick an Attorney General who WILL ensure that the DOJ DOES uphold the laws of the land and "play" policeman. And if the DOJ isn't, isn't the President "supposed" to at least TRY and do something about it? Is Bush trying?
Many people,in this country, ALL of the media, and the Dems, would have gone quite insane, and woud have begun impeachment hearings, and YES, the would somehow have thrown him out of office.
Again you raise this BOGUS specter. ONLY the House of Representatives can start the impeachment process and the GOP controls that body. So how in the world could Bush be impeached? Furthermore, once the truth came out via the court system, those attacking Bush for investigating would put themselves in a very precarious position if they continued to do so. Look at how they ran when the activities of PardonGate became known to the public. What a shame that Bush and company let that opportunity just slip by too.
Frankly, the FFs were RIGHT, in their belief that the " average " person was far too stupid to choose the president, which is WHY we have the Electoral College.
There is a big difference between "stupid" and "uninformed". Most people are not "stupid". They are "uninformed". And all you suggest we do is keep them uninformed. Guess what ... that is a loosing strategy because "uninformed" is the "state" that democRATS want voters to be in when they vote. So you are ONLY doing EXACTLY what the democRATS want. Modern day liberalism could not exist if the voting public was informed. Do you know that the mainstream press didn't even bother to tell the public that Sid Blumenthal was caught lying under oath in an impeachment trial about lying under oath? THAT is where the problem lies and one of the best ways to get the truth out is to use the courts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.